Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19851216_regular45 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 16, 1985 1 m a Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Richards and Turner. Member Kelly arrived at 7:02 p.m. Member Richards presided as Mayor Pro-Tem. EDINA MASONIC LODGE PRESENTS $1,500 CONTRIBUTION TO CITY. Robert Leistikow presented a check in the amount of $1,500 to the City from the Edina Masonic Lodge for use by the Fire Department for rescue equipment, stating that this money came from the proceeds of their annual pancake breakfast. was unanimously adopted by the Council and read by Mayor Pro-Tem Richards: RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION WHEREAS, for the past eight years the Edina Masonic Lodge has donated money to the Edina Fire Department for its rescue equipment; and WHEREAS, this money has been earned by members of the Lodge from their efforts in putting on an annual Edina Flapjack Festival; and WHEREAS, a check in the amount of $1,500 has been generously given to the Edina Fire Department for purchase of rescue equipment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that most sincere appre- ciation be expressed to all members of the Edina Masonic Lodge for its interest in the well-being of all Edina residents through this generous contribution; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be entered into the pages of the Minutes Book of the Edina City Council and that an appropriate copy be presented to the EDINA MASONIC LODGE as a token of gratitude of the Edina City Council. ADOPTED this 16th day of December, 1985. The following resolution EXPLORER DAVID REKER COMMENDED. Chief Craig Swanson read a letter of commendation from Fire Marshal Paulfranz to David Reker for his actions in connection with the fire on November 24, 1985 at The Wallingford apartments. The letter noted that Mr. Reker's knowledge of the building, its occupants and their needs were a valued asset in making decisions on evacuation and rescue operations and reflect credit on him and the Explorer Post of the Edina Police Department. extended their congratulations to Mr. Reker. Members of the Council MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of December 2, 1985 and the Special Meeting of December 9, 1985 were approved as submitted by motion of Member Turner, seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Richards Motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 825-A8 (PSR-4 ZONING FOR GRANDVIEW DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED; RESOLUTIONS RELATED 'THERETO ADOPTED ; REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED BY HRA. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Mayor Pro-Tem Richards stated that this public hearing was for approval of Second Reading of the ordinance to grant PSR-4 Planned Seniors Residence for Grandview Development Company. Planner Craig Larsen explained that the subject site is the location of the closed Biltmore Motel, generally located west of Vernon Avenue and south of W. 52nd Street. He recalled that on August 19, 1985 the Council granted preliminary rezoning approval for 152 rental apartment units designed for occupancy by seniors. with final development plans in support of the request for final rezoning approval. The plan illustrates 71 one-bedroom units, 31 bedroom plus den units, 43 two-bedroom units and 8 three-bedroom units. than on the original plan. of which at least one member will be 62 years of age or older. ment plans submitted conform very closely to the plans approved in August, 1935. Driveway access to Vernon Avenue has been realigned and underground parking has been increased from 76 stalls to 94 stalls. Mr. Larsen noted that most other changes from the previous plans are minor and are design refinement. He showed a graphic illustrating the footprint of the building as now designed and said that it still conforms to all setback requirements. LOOX brick. mission at its meeting of December 4, 1985 recommended final rezoning approval conditioned upon: 1) an executed Redevelopment Contract, 2) final staff review of the landscaping plan, and 3) a Proof of Parking Agreement which will allow the addition of 25 surface parking spaces if needed in the future. Assistant Manager Gordon Hughes then summarized the Redevelopment Agreement that has been negotiated with the developer for this property as to: 1) The redeveloper, 2) Payments to Edina, 3) Construction of project, 4) Construction of public improvements, 5) Assessment agreement, 6) Transfer of the project, 7) Payments by the HRA, and 8) Housing Revenue Bonds. The Agreement mr?': IE ::::.boved by the Grandview Development Company has now returned This represents one additional one-bedroom unit All units will be occupied by individuals or families The final develop- The exterior material will be Mr. Larsen stated that the Community Development and Planning Com- 46 12/16/85 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Turner, Mr. Hughes said the contract provides for giving Edina residents preference as in the Edinborough contract. present and commented that he would respond to any questions concerning the project. public. for Second Reading and moved its adoption as follows: In response to question of Member Frank Dunbar, the developer, was Mayor Pro-Tem Richards called for questions or comments from the No comment being heard, Member Kelly introduced Ordinance No. 825-A8 ORDINANCE NO. 825-A8 BY REZONING PROPERTY TO PSR-4 PLANNED SENIORS WSIDENCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 825) FROM PRD-4 PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 6 of Ordinance No. 825 of the City is amended by adding "The extent of the Planned Seniors Residence District (Sub-District PSR-4) is enlarged by the addition of the following property: the following thereto: Lots I, 2, 3, and 12, Block 1, Grandview Plateau, and that part of the Service Road originally dedicated in the plat of GRANDVIEW PLATEAU, according to the recorded plat thereof, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of Block 1, said GRANDVIEW PLATEAU, thence on an assumed bearing of East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Block 1, a distance of 33.50 feet; thence southwesterly a distance of 326.96 feet along a nontangential curve, concave to northwest having a radius of 3087.95 feet and a central angle of 6 degrees 04 minutes, said curve has a chord bearing of South 21 degrees 58 minutes'TJest; thence South 25 degrees West to the southeasterly line of said Block 1; thence northeasterly along said Block 1 to the point of beginning. The extent of the PRD-4 Planned Residence District is reduced by removing the property described above from the PRD-4 District." Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. Motion for Second Reading and adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Richards Ordinance adopted. Mayor Pro-tem Richards then asked Jerry Gilligan, of Dorsey and Whitney and acting bond counsel, to explain the resolutions in connection with the project in regard to tax increment bonds and multifamily mortgage revenue bonds. Mr. Gilligan summarized that Agenda Item V.D. is a resolution giving preli- minary approval to the issuance of.tax increment bonds in the amount up to $4,500,000 to finance various public improvements in the tax hcrement district. He noted that this was approved in the Redevelopment Plan that was adopted by the Council for the Grandview Area in 1984. lation, it is recommended that a resolution giving preliminary approval to the issuance of tax increment bonds. No.comment or objections being heard, Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Because of possible federal legis- RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE GRANDVIEW AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN: GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE ISSUANCE OF TAX INCREMENT BONDS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. This Council has previously approved the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan (the Redevelopment Plan) and the Grandview Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the Redevelopment Project) and the Grandview Tax Increment Financing Plan (the Financing Plan) for the Grandview Tax Increment District of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Edina (the HRA). approximately $4,500,000 of General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds (the Bonds) in one or more series under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Sections 273.71 to 273.78, in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan and the Financing Plan to finance the public redevelopment cost to be paid or incurred by the City or the HRA in connection with the Redevelopment Plan and the Redevelopment Project. approval by the City. resolution" or "some other official action" with respect to the Bonds and the Redevelopment Project under, and within the meaning of Section 1.103-8(a) of the Treasury Regulations under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended. 2. The Financing Plan provides that the City or the HRA will issue The issuance of the Bonds is given preliminary - 3. This Resolution is intended to, and shall constitute a "bond Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minne this 16th day of December, 1985. (c Attest: J-LhJ5 City Clerk ' Mayor Pro-Tem / 121161 85 47 Member Turner seconded the motion and upon vote thereon, the following voted in favor of its adoption: and the following voted against: whereupon the resolution was declared duly adopted. In reference to Agenda Item V.E. Mr. Gilligan explained that this resolution would approve the issuance of housing revenue bonds in the amount of $13,840,000 the proceeds of which would be loaned by the City to the Grandview Development Company to finance the housing project. tions of the City with the revenues received by the development company pledged to pay the bonds. Mr. Gilligan then summarized the Findings as stated in Section 2 of the resolution in support of issuance of the housing revenue bonds. No comment or objections being heard, Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner None The bonds would be limited obliga- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF MnTIFAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS (BILTMORE PROJECT), OF THE CITY, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING A MULTIFAMILY RENTAL MORTGAGE, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the City), Section 1. Authorization and Recitals. as follows: 1.01. General Authority. By the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 4626, as amended (the "Act"), the City is authorized to plan, administer, issue and sell revenue bonds or obligations and to make or purchase loans to finance one or more multifamily housing developments within its corporate limits, which revenue bonds or obligations shall be payable solely from the revenues of the development. Plan"), by a resolution adopted on April 19 and May 17, 1982, after a public hearing was held thereon. by the Metropolitan Council pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.01 and 462C.04, Subdivision 1. under the Housing Plan (the "Program"), by a resolution adopted on November 4, 1985. The Program provides for the financing of a project under the Act consisting of the acquisition, construction and equipping by Grandview Devel- opment Company Limited Partnership (the "Borrow"), a Minnesota limited partner- ship, of an approximately 152 residential unit multifamily housing project intended primarily for the elderly and related facilities to be located in the City (the "Project"), sota Housing Finance Agency, as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.04, Subdivision 2. 1.02. Proposed Bonds. Representatives of the Borrower have proposed that the City, acting under and pursuant to the Act, issue and sell its Multifamily Mortgage Revenue Bonds (Biltmore Project), in an aggregate principal amount not exceeding $13,840,000 (the "Bonds"), for the purpose of financing the Project and paying costs incurred by the Borrower in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Frank Dunbar is the general partner of the Borrower, and the approval of the Program and the preliminary approval of the issuance of the Bonds granted by resolution of this Council adopted November 4, 1985, is hereby ratified and confirmed in the name of the Borrower. Pursuant to the proposal, the proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned by the City to the Borrower, and the Borrower will agree to make payments sufficient to pay the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds when due. interest in certain revenues and payments to be received by the City under the Loan Agreement (as hereinafter defined) to' a Trustee (as hereinafter defined). and the Bonds have been prepared and submitted to this Council and are hereby directed to be filed in the office of the City Clerk: (a) a Loan Agreement (the "Loan Agreement"), to be dated as of December 1, 1985, proposed to be made and entered into between the City and the Borrower; (b) an'Indenture of Trust (the "Indenture"), to be dated as of December 1, 1985, proposed to be made and entered into between the City and Norwest Bank, Minneapolis, National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee"); (c) a Bond Purchase Agreement (the "Bond Purchase Agreement"), to be dated as of December 16, 1985 proposed to be made and entered into among Dreyfus Tax- Exempt Money Market Fund, Inc. (the "Purchaser"), the City and the Borrower; and of December 1, 1985, proposed to be made and entered into among the Borrower, the Trustee, the City and Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood Incorporated (the "Remarket- ing Agent"). This Council has approved a Housing Plan for the City (the "Housing The Housing Plan has been reviewed and commented on This Council has approved a multifamily housing program The Program has been reviewed and approved by the Minne- The City will grant a security 1.03. Documentation. Forms of the following documents relating to the Project (d) a Remarketing Agreement (the "Remarketing Agreement"),, to be dated as Section 2. Findings. It is hereby found, determined and declared that: (a) the financing of the Project, the authorization of the Bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $13,840,000, the execution and delivery 12/16/85 48 of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement and the performance of all covenants and agreements of the ity contained in the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement and of all other acts and things required under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to make the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Bonds valid and binding obligations in accordance with their terms, are authorized by the Act; as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.01; 5.n the amount of $13,840,000 be issued by the City upon the terms set forth in the Indenture, under the provisions of which the City grants to the Trustee a security interest in certain revenues and payments to be received by the City under the Loan Agreement as security for the payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds; required to be revised from time to time as necessary, so as to produce income and revenue sufficient to provide for prompt payment of principal of and interest on all Bonds issued under the Indenture when due; and the Loan Agreement also provides that the Borrower is required to pay all expenses of the operation and maintenance of the Project, including, but without limitation, adequate insurance thereon and insurance against a11 liability for injury to persons or property arising from the operation'thereof, and all taxes and special assessments levied upon or with respect to the site of the Project and payable during the term of the Loan Agreement; (e) the execution and delivery of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement will not conflict with, or constitute on the part of the City a breach of or a default under, any existing agreement, indenture, mortgage, lease or other instrument to which the City is subject or is a party or by which it is bound; provided that this finding is made solely for the purpose of estopping the City from denying the validity of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement or the Bond Purchase Agreement by reason of the existence of any facts contrary to this finding; this Council, threatened against the City questioning the organization or boundaries of the City or the right of any officer of the City to hold his or her office, or in any manner questioning the right and power of the City to execute and deliver the Bonds, or otherwise questioning the validity of the Bonds or the execution, delivery or validity of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement or the Bond Purchase Agreement or questioning the appropriation of revenues to payment of the Bonds or the right of the City to loan the proceeds of the Bonds to the Borrower; the State of Minnesota to make the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarket- ing Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement the valid and binding obligations of the City in accordance with their terms will have been done upon adoption of this Resolution and execution of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement; provided that this finding is made solely for the purpose of estopping the City from denying the validity of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement by reason of the existence of any facts contrary to this finding; and laws of the State of Minnesota and is authorized to issue the Bonds in (b) (c) the Program has been approved by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency it is desirable that a series of Multifamily Mortgage Revenue Bonds I (d) the loan repayments contained in the Loan Agreement are fixed, and are I (f) no litigation is pending or, to the best knowledge of the members of . (g) all acts and things required under the Constitution and the laws of (h) the City is duly organized and existing under the Constitution and . accordance with the Act. 3. Approval of Documents. The forms of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement I and the Bond Purchase Agreement referred to in Section 1.03 are approved subject to such modifications as are deemed appropriate and approved by the City Attorney and the City Manager, which approval shall be conclusively evidenced by execution of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Bond Purchase Agreement, the Remarketing Agreement and the Bonds by the Mayor or Deputy Mayor, the City Manager and the City Clerk, as the case may be. The Mayor or Deputy..Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute the Loan Agreement upon execut2on thereof by the Borrower, to execute the Indenture upon execution thereof by the Trustee, to execute the Bond Purchase Agreement upon execution thereof by the Purchaser and the Borrower, and to execute the Remarketing Agreement upon execution thereof by the Borrower, the Trustee, the City, and the Remarketing Agent. filed and recorded as provided therein. The Mayor or Deputy Nayor, the City Manager and the City Clerk are also authorized and directed to execute such Copies of all of the documents shall be delivered, . 12/16/85 other instruments as may be required to give effect to the transactions herein contemplated. 4. The Bonds; Terms, Sale and Execution. 4.01. Authorization. The City hereby authorized the issuance of the Bonds The Bonds are hereby sold to in the aggregate principal amount of $13,840,000, in the form and upon the terms set forth in the Indenture and this resolution. the Purchaser at the price and upon the terms contained in the Bond Purchase Agreement. authorized and directed to execute the Bonds as prescribed.herein and in the Indenture and to deliver them to the Trustee, together with a certified copy of this Resolution, the other documents required in the Indenture, and such other certificates, documents and instruments as may be appropriate to effect the transactions herein contemplated. cating agent for the Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1. 4.03. Modifications, Absence of Officers. The approval hereby given to the various documents referred to above includes an approval of such modifications thereto, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by the City Attorney and the City Manager prior to the execution of the documents. officer or officers of the City herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence or disability of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor, any of the documents authorized by this Resolution to be executed may be executed by the acting Mayor, and in the absence or disability of the City Manager or the City Clerk by such officer of the City who, in the opinion of the City Attorney, may execute such documents. 4.02. Execution. The Mayor or Deputy Mayor, and the City Clerk are hereby The Trustee is hereby appointed authenti- The execution of any instrument by the appropriate Section 5, Authentication of Proceedings. The Mayor or Deputy Mayor, City Manager and City Clerk and other officers of the City are authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser and bond counsel certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds,.and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officer's custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained therein. Section 6. Limitations of the City's Obligations. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Bonds, the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement or the Bond Purchase Agreement or any other documents referred to in Section 1.03, the Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation, and shall not be payable from nor charged upon any funds other than the revenues pledged to the payment thereof, and no Holder of the Bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the Bonds or the premium, if any, or interest thereon, or to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City other than those rights and interests of the City under the Loan Agreement which have been pledged to the payment thereof, and the Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City other than those rights and interests of the City under the Loan Agreement which have been pledged to the payment thereof. The agreement of the City to perform the covenants and other provi- sions contained in this Resolution or the Bonds, the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Remarketing Agreement or the Bond Purchase Agreement and the other documents listed in Section 1.03 shall be subject at all times to the availability of the revenues furnished by the Borrower sufficient to pay all costs of such performance or the enforcement thereof, and the City shall not be subject to any personal or pecuniary liability thereon other than as stated above. Adopted: December 16, 1985. Attest: m a Member Turner seconded the motion and upon vote thereon, the following voted in favor of its adoption: and the following voted against: whereupon the resolution was declared duly adopted. Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner None 12/16/85 Nayor Pro-tem Richards then convened a meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the. purpose of formally approving the Redevelop- ment Agreement. . Present were Commissioners Bredesen, Kelly, Richards and Turner. Commissioner Courtney was absent. Commissioner Bredesen then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority that it hereby grants final approval to the Redevelopment Contract between the City and Grandview Development Company; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman and Assistant Secretary are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Agreement on behalf of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority. . Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Commissioner Turner. RESOLUTION Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting was then adjourned by motion of Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Turner and unanimously carried. PRELIMINBY PLAT APPROVAL FOR LOTS 41 AI 42, BLOCK 2, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND ADDITION CONTINUED TO JANUARY 6, 1986. Affidavits of Notice were presented by . Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Mr. Larsen advised that the subject property is located east of Minnehaha Boulevard and south of W, 52nd Street and consists of two, individually developed single dwelling lots. Both lots are relatively narrow and exceptionally deep, each measuring approximately 60 feet by 400 feet. Total area in the two lots is 44,854 square feet. The owners, Richard Steiner and Robert Gislason, are proposing a four lot subdivision which would create two, new buildable lots. Lot 1 would measure 78 feet in width, 119 feet in depth and contain 9,282 square feet. in width, 119 feet in depth and contain 10,472 square feet. Lots 3 and 4, for the existing dwellings, would contain 13,400 and 11,700 square-feet respectively. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum lot depth of 120 feet. a lot depth variance would be required. The new lots.would meet all other Zoning Ordinance requirements for single dwelling unit lots. stated that within the South Harriet Park Subdivision a lot width of approxi- mately 60 feet seems typical. Lot depths within the two block area east of the creek between 52nd and 54th Streets vary from 220 to over 400 feet. to the path of the creek and the need to align with roads to the north, the lots in this area are unusually deep. property available on this combined site to provide two new lots which would be very similar to the lots north of 52nd Street. Indianola and Halifax, north of 52nd Street are generaly 75 or 80 feet, and most lots are between 105 and 110 feet in depth. 1985 the Community Development and Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed subdivision with the following conditions: 1) Increase the frontage on each new lot to 85 Feet to corcpensate for the-lack of lot depth, 2) In order to have adequate spacing between the new home on’Lot.1 and the existing home at 5209 3linnehaha’Boulevard (immediately south) the rear yard setback should be increased to 40 feet and should be recorded as a restriction with the plat, 3) the watermain in 52nd Street to serve the new lots, and 4) dedication. the owners of the subject property. Mr. Cardarelle stated that Mr. Steiner, 5201 Minnehaha Boulevard, has sold Lot 42 retaining only 155 feet frontage €or the two new proposed lots and therefore could not meet the 85 feet new lot frontage condition without re-negotiating the sale. Mr. Cardarelle pointed out that at the building setback line the lots would measure 80 and 81.5 feet respectively due to the alignment of the alley. Thomas Tarbox, 5128 Juanita expressed the concern of the neighbors that any new dwelling constructed on the new lots would not exceed 1.5 stories to be compatible with existing homes in the area. Wayne Wenger, 5212 Halifax Avenue, said he was concerned that approval of the proposed subdivision would lead to Lot 2 would measure 80 feet I Since Lots 1 and 2 would provide only 119 feet, Mr. Larsen Due He noted that there is adequate Lot widths on Juanita, At its meeting of December 4, Execution of a developer’s agreement for the extension of Subdivision Mr. Larsen stated that Frank Cardarelle was present representing other’zurther subdividing of lots in the &ea in keeping with the neighborhood. Mr. Larsen at this issue and has concluded that there is without creating necklots and that the Zoning street frontage of 30 feet for new lots. Mr. ‘be agreeable to placing a deed restriction on thus creating small lots not responded that staff had looked no logical subdivision potential Ordinance requires a minimum Steiner was asked if he would the new lots as to the height of any new construction. Mr. Steiner indicated he would be willing to work with Mr. Tarbox and other neighbors to draft a deed restriction for the new 12/16/85 51 lots in response to their concerns as to building height. then made a motion to continue the hearing for preliminary plat approval to the Council meeting of January 6, 1986, to provide an opportunity to negotiate additional lot frontage for the new proposed Lots 1 and 2. by Member Kelly. Member Bredesen Motion was seconded Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL GRANTED FOR HONEYWELL, INC. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Larsen stated that the subject property is bounded on the west by County Road 18, on the south by Manor Homes and on the east by Nine Mile Creek. north of the site are the Londonderry Topmhomes and to the northeast are single family homes. The 21.74 acre site is zoned PID Planned Industrial District and is developed with a structure containing a gross area of 96,768 square feet and is occupied by Honeywell, Inc. as a office-research facility. Mr. Larsen said that Honeywell has submitted plans for a 3-story building containing a gross floor area of 169,690 square feet proposed to be located immediately north of and connected with the existing building. The building will be cut into the hillside which will allow the roof elevation of the new building to be the same as the existing building. building. including building and parking setbacks. A foor area ratio in the PID District of ..5 is permitted; a floor area ratio of .27 is proposed. provided by the plan would exceed ordinance requirements. The landscaping plan presented exceeds ordinance requirements both as to size and numbers of stock and emphasizes perimeter screening especially along the southern boundary providing a visual buffer for the residents of Manor Homes. ing is provided around the building and the proposed new road out to Londonderry Drive. Mr. Larsen pointed out that currently the Honeywell site is served only by a single access point midway on the west side onto Lincoln Drive. The plans propose a second access point onto Londonderry Drive. east of Lincoln Drive is a public street, it currently serves only the residents of the Londondewy Townhomes. The use of this proposed access will increase the average daily traffic on Londonderry from 420 trips to approximately 1,240 trips. Approximately 200 of these trips would occur in the morning and evening rush hours. Mr. Larsen advised that at its meeting of December 4, 1985 the Community Develop- ment and Planning Commission unanimously approved the building expansion and related improvements. However, the Commission was split by a 5 to 5 vote on the issue of the proposed access on Londonderry Drive. Reasons given by staff in support of the proposed two-way access on Londonderry were: 1) to improve access in and out of the site, 2) to reduce left turn conflicts on Lincoln Drive, 3) to balance traffic on each leg of the Lincoln/Londonderry intersection, and 4) to provide a turn around on Londonderry for snowplows and emergency vehicles. David Opheim, Honeywell Defense Systems, presented an overview of Honeywell's plans for the building in the future. present building since 1979 and the explansion plans are for office and engineer- ing space; no manufacturing will be conducted in the building. It currently houses approximately 300 employees and when expanded it is anticipated that the number will increase by the year 1990 to 750 people. The reason for the expansion is two-fold: 1) to consolidate the Honeywell people presently spread over eight buildings in the southwest suburbs, and 2) expansion of business. Mr. Opheim added that Honeywell has employed the architectural firm of Lindberg Pierce, Inc. to develop a building concept that would: 1) require no variances, 2) comply with all EPA standards, 3) stress protection of the wetlands and natural vegetation, 4) maintain or exceed present landscaping, 5) blend with the terrain and the existing structure, and 6) address the problem of traffic. Honeywell requested that Lindberg Pierce employ a traffic engineering firm (Westwood) to study the traffic problem, take measurements and propose recommendations to minimize the traffic impact for the Edina neighborhood. A traffic flow study showed that the center of gravity for Honeywell employees is the intersection of Highways 55 and 18, concluding that the majority of employees will approach the subject site from the north and west as opposed to traveling through Edina. Mr. Opheim noted that Honeywell works a flex hour system which will disburse the traffic flow, thus minimizing the traffic impact during peak hours. He advised that Honeywell mailed notices to affected neighbors inviting them to a meeting on the proposed expansion. At the meeting they were provided with an informal overview of the plans for the facility and were shown the model provided by Lindberg Pierce and were offered an opportunity to comment, question and critique the plans. One primary issue was identified at the meeting, that being the proposed northern access on Londonderry Drive. Subsequent to that meeting, Honeywell met with City staff to review alternatives to the northern access. Staff concluded that the most logical approach is still the northern entrance as defined. stated that Honeywell is prepared to consider access alternatives if deemed Directly Exterior materials will be brick to match the existing The proposed addition would comply with all ordinance requirements, The 763 parking stalls Substantial internal landscap- Although Londonderry Drive He said that Honeywell has occupied the Mr. Opheim 12/16 185 52 appropriate. ramps onto Highway 18 at the Londonderry intersection is scheduled for 1986 and should help relieve congestion at that point. Honeywell expansion, it is felt that warrants will be met for a four-way stop at Lincoln/Londonderry. design of the proposed building and explained the factors leading to the building concept. the site and that parking areas will not be visible from Lincoln Drive. building will be heavily planted from the north together with the proposed driveway to the north. that presently 550 cars enter and exit the site each day and to reduce left turns on Lincoln Drive coming from the north it appears that a driveway to the north accessing Londonderry Drive is the best solution. However, after consultation with Westwood traffic engineers it was decided that there are three possibilities: 1) the proposed two-way access off Londonderry Drive on the north, 2) modification from a two-way access to a one-way entrance only from Londonderry, and 3) one entrance only from the west off Lincoln Drive. Dick Koppy, Westwood Planning and Engineering Company, stated that they did the traffic study for the Honeywell site. He noted that the intersection of Lincoln and Londonderry is currently almost at four-way stop warrants. When the Honeywell expansion is completed it will meet warrants for four-way stop signs. From a traffic engineering standpoint, the main reasons for the pro- posed north entrance to the site were: 1) to even out the flow of traffic on all four legs of the Lincoln/Londonderry intersection, and 2) to avoid the significant left turns into the site from Lincoln Drive. Member Turner asked if a left turn lane for southbound traffic into the site could be constructed on Lincoln Drive. the west side that a left turn lane would be recommended. the roadway would have to be reconstructed to accommodate the left turn lane. Mr. Koppy explained that a second entrance off Lincoln Drive is not considered feasible for grade or proximity to the intersection reasons. opposition to the proposed access off Londonderry Drive were the following: Pete Schenck, 5712 Duncan Lane, representing the Londonderry Townhomes Associa- tion; Ellen Burdette, 5708 Duncan Lane, Richard Patch, 5721 Duncan Lane; Jay Beecroft, 5772 Tucker Lane, Tom Gerard, Londonderry Townhomes; and Linda Whitley, 5712 Duncan Lane. Londonderry Townhomes Association in opposition to the proposed access. In addition to their primary concern that the proposed access affect their ability to enter and exit the townhomes, they voiced concerns that their property values would be reduced, that they would be looking at a 3-story commercial building, and that they were concerned about the growth in the'number of people at the Honeywell facility in the future. Mayor Pro-Tem Richards asked Mr. Opheim to address the issue of the ultimate build-out and use of the property. Mr. Opheim explained that currently the engineering space is at 300 square feet per person because laboratories and computer space is included in the computation. facility it is expected to increase slightly to approximately 330 square feet per person. by the year 1990. with a basement garage for approximately 20 cars and a snowplow. will reduce the traffic to the site; consolidation of employees in one location and inclusion of a cafeteria in the expansion to reduce noon hour travel. increase from approximately 1,500 vehicles daily now to 2,500 vehicles is anticipated. Member Bredesen asked if left turns onto the site from Lincoln Drive are a big problem. of the grade and curve on Lincoln, any number of left turns going south onto that site becomes very difficult at peak traffic hours. From a staff perspec- tive the proposed two-way access off Londonderry Drive on the north or a one- way entrance only from Londonderry are clearly better alternatives than one entrance off Lincoln Drive because vehicles making left turns onto the site must do so against oncoming traffic. vehicle stacking potential. for the expansion are excellent, that they meet all ordinance requirements, that the landscaping is attractive and that it is a good use of the site, but that the issue is traffic. alternative is by means of a new north access onto Londonderry. added that of concern to her is a basic principle in the City's planning to provide good separation of dissimilar land uses. have been good examples to this point in terms of least amount of impact on residential areas. the residential use of the property to the north and therefore would support one access off Lincoln Drive by expanding it and putting in a left turn lane. 1 Member Bredesen stated he would support Member Turner's position and commented I that he felt Honeywell has been a good neighbor in attempting to blend in >ir. Larsen clarified that the installation of signals at the After completion of the Jim Lindberg, Lindberg Pierce, briefly reviewed the He reiterated that extensive landscaping is provided for The Mr. Lindberg pointed out that the traffic study showed I Mr. Koppy responded that if there is only one entrance on He explained that Speaking in I Mr. Schenck presented a petition from the members 'of the I_ As marketing, management and executive spaces are added to the Projections for the building are for 750 employees occupying it Mr. Opheim said that the parking lots will provide 763 stalls Several factors An Engineer Fran Hoffman responded that given the factors I Also, because of the grade there is little Member Turner commented that she felt the plans From a traffic management point of view the best Member Turner Fabri-tec and Honeywell She stated that the north access does visually impact I' 12/16/85 Ln I: m 16 their facility and in not attempting to maximize the use of the site. He said that the one entrance off Lincoln Drive may not work because of the left hand turn problems but would like to start that way and if it is determined in next year or two that it is not workable to keep the option open to consider the one-way entrance off Londonderry. Member Kelly commented that she would like Honeywell to consider another entrance on Lincoln Drive along the Manor Homes on the south side of the site. the resolution as follows and moved its adoption: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the Final Development Plan for Honeywell, Inc., 5901 County Road #18, presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of December 16, 1985, be and is hereby approved, subject to one entrance only from the west off Lincoln Drive. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen. Following discussion, Member Turner introduced RESOLUTION Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. Member Turner stated that the understanding of the Council is that if Honeywell works with the City staff and finds that the one entrance as approved is too dangerous that they will come back with an alternate access plan for the Council to consider at its meeting of January 6, 1986. Mayor Pro-Tem Richards asked if Honeywell would give notice to the neighbors if they decide to come back with an alternate plan for access. they bring the issue back to the Council. Mr. Opheim agreed that they would mail notices if LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR 4301-05 WEST 62ND STREET. Mr. Larsen informed the Council that the proponents, David Shank and Suzyn Ware, are requesting a party wall division of an existing double bungalow. Separate utility connections are provided and staff would recommend approval. No objection being heard, Member Bredesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: That part of the North 334 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter lying east of the West 658.5 feet thereof and lying west of the west line of Brookview Avenue extended to the north line of the said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter in Section 30, Township 28, Range 24, the west boundary of said tract is marked by Judicial Landmarks set at the southwest corner thereof and at a point on the west line thereof 110.25 feet south of the Northwest corner thereof, except that portion of the above described tract lying southwesterly of the following described line constituting the center line of Valley View Road; the Northeast Quarter of said Section 30 di'stant549.79 feet east of the northwest corner thereof; angle of 26O36' with said north line, when measured from east to south for a distance of 500 feet and there terminating. Beginning at a point on the north line of thence running southeasterly at an WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels"> described as follows: Parcel A: That part of the North 334 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter lying east of the West 658.5 feet thereof and lying west of the west line of Brookview Avenue extended to the north line of the said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter in Section 30, Township 28, Range 24 the west boundary of said tract is marked by Judicial Landmarks set at the southwest corner thereof and at a point on the west line thereof 110.25 feet south of the Northwest corner thereof, except that portion of the above described tract lying southwesterly of the following described line constituting the center line of Valley View Road; a point on the north line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 30 distant 549.79 feet east of the northwest corner thereof; thence running southeasterly at an angle of 260 36' with said north line, when measured from east to south for a distance of 500 feet and there terminating. Also except the East 45.33 feet of the above described tract; and Beginning at Parcel B: The East 45.33 feet of the following described property: That part of the North 334 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter lying east of the West658.5feet thereof and lying west of the west line Brookview Avenue extended to the north line of the said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter in Section 30, Township 28, Range 24, the west boundary of said tract is marked by Judicial Landmarks set at the southwest corner thereof .* 12/16 I85 54 and at a point on the west line thereof 110.25 fee; south of the Northwest corner thereof, except that portion of the above described tract lying southwesterly of the following described line constitut- ing the center line of Valley View Road; the north line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 30 distant 549.79 feet east of the northwest corner thereof; southeasterly at an angle of 260 36' with said north line, when measured from east to south for a distance of 500 feet and there terminating. Except the North 33 feet thereof, as set forth in Book 2035 of Deeds, page 415. Beginning at a point on thence running "HEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Xegulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provisions that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinentordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. SNOWPLOWING CONCERN EXPRESSED BY DICK WIESE, 5509 HUNTER STREET. Dick Wiese, 5509 Hunter Street, asked that the Public Works Department alternate direction of plowing on his street so that he would not be the recipient of the an excessive amount of snow in his driveway. snowplow drivers had been instructed to alternate the plowing on Hunter Street Mr. Hoffman responded that the and that he would follow up on this matter to see that it was corrected. f orma1 action was taken. BID AWARDED FOR SIX 1986 POLICE PURSUIT VEHICLES. Tabluation of bids for six (6) 1986 Full-size Police Pursuit Vehicles were presented showing Thane Hawkins No Polar Chevrolet at $69,144.00, Brookdale Ford at $69,330.00 and Superior Ford at $72,924.00. award of bid to recommended low bidder, Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet at $69,144.00. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Bredesen for Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR ONE 1986 112 TON CARRYALL, NINE PASSENGER, 4-WHEEL DRIVE. Tabulation of bids for one 1986 1/2 Ton Carryall, Nine Passenger, 4-Wheel Drive Vehicle were presented showing Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet at $13,797.00. Mr. Rosland advised that only one bid was received prior to the time set for bid opening. of bid to Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet at $13,797.00. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. Motion,of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Turner for award AWARD OF BID FOR TWO DUMP TRUCKS WITH BOX CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 30, 1985. Mr. Rosland presented tabluation of bids for two dump trucks with box as follows: North Star International with Midland Box $41,480.00 Mac Queen Box 41,635 .OO La Hass Box 43,652 .OO 41,778 .OO Crysteel Box 43,683 .OO La Hass Box 43,950.00 42,678 .OO La Hass Box 44,892.50 44,560.00 45 , 756 .OO La Hass Box 46,098 .OO Astleford Internation with Midland Box Brookdale Ford with Midland Box Boyer Ford with La Hass Box Superior Ford with Crysteel Box Department recommendation is for award of bid to North Star International with the La Hass Box for a total of $87,304.00 for these reasons: 1) Midland Box does not meet specifications, 2) Midland is not an authorized dealer for Perfection Hoist and their body is not approved by Perfection. by Mac Queen is not recommended nor does it meet specifications. president of Midland Equipment Company, presented data in support of the Midland Box. The Heil box Bernie Fink, Following discussion on the specifications and the issue of authorized 12/16/85 55 dealership, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Turner to continue the award of bid to the Year-End Council Meeting of December 30, 1985, at 5 p.m. to verify the information which has been received. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR TWO 1/2 TON PICKUPS. Tabluation of bids for two (2) 1/2 Ton Pickup Trucks (Street Department and Park Department) showed Thane Hawkins Chev- rolet at $9,297.00 each, Brookdale Ford at $9,779.00 each and Superior Ford at $9,941.00 each. Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid to recommended low bidder, Thane Hawkins Chevrolet, at $9.297.00 each. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR ONE TON CARGO VAN. showed Thane Hawkins Chevrolet at $11,597.00, Superior Ford at $11,689.00 and Brookdale Ford at $11,973.00. Turner for award of bid to recommended low bidder, Thane Hawkins Chevrolet, at $11,597.00. Tabluation of bids for a One Ton Cargo Van Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR ONE TRIPLE COMBINATION PUMPER FIRE TRUCK; OPTION EQUIPMENT. Tabluation of bids for one Triple Combination Pumper Fire Truck showed General Safety Equipment Corporation at $137,771, with a deduction of $1,800 if the City pays for the chassis $55,500) when it is.delivered in about four months. Bid of Custom Fire Apparatus, Inc. was $139,835, with a deduction of $2,500 if the City pays for the chassis ($51,000) when delivered in about four months. Mr. Rosland noted that the Fire Department's recommendation is for award of bid to Custom Fire Apparatus. support of the recommendation, includ,ing a slide presentation showing rust pena- tration on a General Pumper which the City acquired in 1977 and which the Fire Department ~7as not satisfied with because of the rust problems. Speaking in support of respective bids submitted were Kevin Kirvida of General Safety Equip- ment Corporation and Jim Kirvida of Custom Fire Apparatus, Inc. Member Bredesen then made a motion for award of bid to low bidder, General Safety Equipment Corporation, for purchase of one Triple Combination Pumper Fire Truck. was seconded by Member Turner. Frank Wellman, Assistant Fire Chief, made a presentation in Motion Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. Tabulations of bids for Option Equipment were as follows: Motion of Oswald Fire Hose Company $6,121.00 Mid-Central Fire, Inc. 7,840 .OO Fire Safety & Communications 7,588.00 Custom Fire Apparatus 6,200 .OO General Safety Equipment Corporation 6,930.00 Laverne Fire Apparatus 6 , 759.00 Conway Fire and Safety 6,864.50 Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Turner for award of bid for Option Equipment to recommended low bidder, Oswald Fire Hose Company at $6,121.00. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR REPAIR AND LABOR FOR BRAEMAR PAVILION EMERGENCY. Mr. Rosland reported that an emergency repair of the refrigeration system at Braemar Pavilion was completed by Gartrier Refrigeration and asked for Council approval of the expenditure. the emergency repair in the amount of $10,581.44 to Gartner Refrigeration. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Bredesen approving Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR WING AND PLOW FOR LOADER. bids for Wing and Plow for Loader showing La Hass Manufacturing & Sale at $6,946.00, Little Falls Machine at $7,475.00 and Ziegler, Inc. at $17,118.00. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Turner for award of bid to recommended low bidder, La Hass Manufacturing & Sales, at $6,946.00. Mr. Rosland presented tabulation of Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR UNDERDRAIN DIFFUSER NOZZLES FOR IRON REMOVAL TREATMENT PLANT REPAIR OF TANKS. $5,760.00 for Underdrain Diffuser Nozzels for Iron Removal Treatment; Plant Repair of Tanks, advising that they are the sole supplier of ABS Plastic Difusser Nozzles. Mr. Rosland presented bid of Tonka Equipment Company at Motion of Member Kelly was seconded by Member Turner for 12/16 185 56 award of bid to Tonka Equipment Company, sole supplier, at $5,760.00. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR HEATING AND AC REPLACEMENT/50TH STMET LIQUOR STORE. Tabulation of bids for replacement of existing heater and AC on 50th Street Liquor Store roof showed Centraire at $13,749.00, Northwestern Services at $14,446.00 and Midland at $14,500.00. by Member Kelly for award of bid to recommended low bidder, Centraire, at $13,749.00. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded I Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR CHAIRS FOR BRAEMAR CLUB HOUSE. Tabulation of bids for 175 chairs for the Braemar Club House showed The Pink Companies at $6,893.25, Palm Brothers at $7,644.00, General Office Products at $16,611.25 and Hendrickson & Associates at $8,925.00. Motion of Member Kelly was seconded by Member Turner for award of bid to recommended low bidder, The Pink Companies, at $6,893.25. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR CARPETING FOR MAIN FLOOR - BRAEMAR CLUB HOUSE AND PRO SHOP. Tabulation of bids for carpeting for the main floor of Braemar Club House and Pro Shop showed Merit Supply at $9,350.00, J & J Industries at $10,391.25, Karagheusian, Inc. at $9,596.50, The Pink Companies at $9,881.25 and Lakeville Interiors at $11,513.25. Motion of Member Kelly was seconded by Member Turner for award of bid to recommended low bidder, Merit Supply, at $9,350.00. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR ELECTRICAL WORK AT BRAEMAR CLUB HOUSE. Tabulation of bids for electrical work for Braemar Golf Course Club House showed Ridgedale Electric at $64,077.00, Edina Electric at $86,590 and Comm Tech at $89,765. Member Kelly was seconded by Member Bredesen for award of bid to recommended low bidder, Ridgedale Electric, at $64,077.00. . Motion of Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. TAX REFORM THREAT TO TAX-EXEM!?T STATUS OF MUNICIPAL BONDS DISCUSSED. Gilligan, bond counsel for the City, updated the Council on the tax reform package which the Congress is currently is considering. He explained that Congress may impose severe restrictions on traditional uses of municipal bonds. The proposed legislation would make two distinctions - governmental and non- governmental bonds based on use limits and would mean that cities will be able to issue tax-exempt bonds only as long as these use limits or "tests" are not exceeded. governmental unless an exemption applied. just issued for the Edinborough project would fall within the non-governmental catageory because part of the proceeds were used to buy property to be used by non-governmental people. There would be a state-wide cap on all non-governmental bonds of $200 per capita. multi-family housing bonds, single family mortgage revenue bonds issued by the MHFA and hospital bonds. This would mean there would only be approximately $800 million of those types of bonds in Minnesota to be divided among those various uses. The more traditional types of bonds such as street improve- . ment bonds, tax increment bonds where the facilities would be used only by the government (parking ramps or parks) would fall within the governmental bonds and would not be subject to the per capita limitation but tHere would be some reporting requirements and also a requirement that any arbitrage earned on investment proceeds until expended would have to be rebated to the federal government. by the House of Representatives and if enacted would have a January 1, 1986 effective date. until June of 1986 and there is a movement to make any effective dates January 1, 1987. Grandview Redevelopment area. Jerry Bond issues failing these tests would be taxable and termed non- Mr. Gilligan said that the bonds Countered against those would be industrial bonds, I Efr. Gilligan explained that the bill is presently being considered It is predicted that it would not be acted upon by the Senate The Council then discussed what effect this may have on plans for the No formal action was taken. RELEASE FROM LIEN OF REQUEST TO TRANSFER ASSESSMENTS APPROVED FOR DETJEY HILL SECOND ADDITION. was platted several years ago the City and Laukka and Associates entered into an agreement whereby special assessments would be allocated among the various lots of Dewey Hill Second Addition. special assessments that were allocated and are requesting that the City now release them from that agreement. Nr. Hughes explained that when Dewey Hill Second Addition Laukka and Associates, Inc. have now paid the Member Bredesen introduced the following 12/16/85 57 I 5 a resolution and moved its adoption: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota that it hereby approves the release of the following tract of land from the lien of that certain Request to Transfer Assessments between Laukka, First Edina National Bank and the City, dated May 8, 1979, filed July 20, 1979 as Document No. 1339210: Lots 1-13, Block 1, Dewey Hill Fourth Addition, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Release on behalf of the City of Edina. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. RESOLUTION Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS FOR 1986 DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland stated that he had talked with Raymond O'Connell and Jim McWethy regarding their respec- tive reappointments to the Library Board and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board, as requested by the Council. Mr. O'Connell has served three 3-year terms and is ineligible for re-appointment; Mr. McWethy is interested in being re-appointed to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board. Member Turner thereupon introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Jim McWethy has served as a member of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board; and WHEREAS, his term of office will expire on March 8, 1986, and WHEREAS, he has demonstrated his interest and concern for the preservation and management of Minnehaha Creek and its watershed; NOW, THEEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that it hereby recommends Jim McWethy for re-appointment to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. . Rollcall : Ayes:. Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. COUNCIL WORK CALENDAR FOR 1986 DISCUSSED. The Council Work Calendar for 1986 was distributed to the Council Members. Mr. Rosland pointed out that March 8 and March 15, 1986, are alternate dates for the workshop on the role of the Council. Mayor Pro-tern Richards suggested that this be placed on the January 6, 1986 Council agenda so that the date could be firmed up. Member Turner said she would be away for the April 7, 1986 Council Meeting. The question of a quorum was raised and Mr. Rosland was asked to confirm the dates of the school spring break. Member Turner .reminded the Council that the annual appointments to the City's advisory boards and commissions are made in February and therefore the Council should conduct interviews during January for any vacancies. issue of succeeding terms was discussed briefly and the Council requested it be placed on the January 6, 1986 agenda. The No action was taken. AMM PROPOSED ADDENDUM TO POLICIES/LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland called the Council's attention to the AMM's proposed addendum to policies and legislative proposals, noting that they will be considered by the association membership on January 9, 1986 and that any comments or changes should be conveyed to Member Turner .who represents the City in the Association. commented that the recommended policies are consistent with those of the Council and are minor changes. 1987-1988 Legislative biennium. Section stated that "Cities should continue to have authority to use tax incre- ment financing to achieve goals for low and moderate income housing" and suggested the Council discuss that issue. No action was taken. Member Turner Majdr revisions of policies will be proposed for the She pointed out an addition to the Housing EIS ON MALL OF AMERICA AND FANTASYWORLD DISCUSSED. voluminous Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been received on the Mall of America and Fantasyworld proposed to be constructed in Bloomington and that staff has initially looked at the traffic impact, would require a tremendous amount of time to totally analyze the Draft EIS. Engineer Fran Hoffman then presented graphics from the "Transportation Plan for Airport South District" which has been prepared for the City of Bloomington which included the conculsions/recommendations of the plan, the year 2000 back- ground traffic and the year 2005 daily traffic with the Mall of America and Fantasyworld completed'. for Edina would be the resulting congestion on 1-494 if the project is con- structed and that a primary mitigating factor would be land use management Mr. Rosland reported that a He commented that it Mr. Hoffman pointed out that the major traffic impact 121161 85 58 along the 1-494 corridor. He explained that the recommended improvements to the Cedar Avenue and 1-494 interchange would be a four-level type which does not presently exist in the metropolitan area and that the total package cost would be $116 Million of which $50 Million will be directly related to the Mall of America project. A widening of 1-494 to six lanes going west from T.H. 100 is in the Metropolitan Council's current transportation plans and it is important that that improvement does not lose its priority because of the proposed Mall of America project. agreed by the Council that staff be directed to further review the traffic 1986 proposed positions for their consideration. After some discussion, it was informally *impact of the Nall of America and bring back to the Council on January 6, No formal action was taken. SNO'WPLOWING OF COMMERCIAL PARKING LOTS DISCUSSED. come of the commercial parking lots were not well plowed following the recent snowstorm and asked if the City has any control over commercial lots. response, Mr. Rosland pointed that this would involve private property over which the City has no control. Member Kelly stated that In No action was taken.. CLOSING OF SEVERAL SKATING RINKS PROPOSED. 'Member Turner noted that the Park Board Minutes of November 12, 1985 proposed that a decision be made as to the possibility of'closing some of the ick skating rinks due to the cost of keeping them maintained and she requested that the Council be informed when that decision is made. Gymnastics/Hockey Association Feasibility Study which will determine the pop- ulation needs in relationship to the existing rinks. will be reported to the Park Board. Mr. Rosland added that because.this is a sensitive subject the Council will be involved in making that decision. Mr . Kojetin said that the issue will be addressed through 'the The results of the study OPTICAL SCAN VOTING EQUIPMENT TO BE TESTED AT GOVERNMENT CENTER. reminded the Council members that optical scan voting equipment will be avail- able for public inspection and testing during the week of December 16 on the public service level of the Government Center and urged the Council members to avail themselves of this opportunity to examine and test this new type of voting sys tern. LETTER TO BE SENT TO METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REGARDING mTROPOLITAN SIGNIFICANCE REVIEW PROCESS. Mr. Rosland reported that a letter has been drafted to Sandra Gardebring, Chair of the Metropolitan Council, relaying the comments of the Council on the effectiveness of the metropolitan significance review process in light of the City's recent experience with the process in connection with the Homart-Bloomington/Edina issue. ORDINANCE ON SNOW REMOVAL FROM SIDEWALKS TO BE REVIEWED. Mr; Rosland advised that staff will be reviewing the ordinance on the subject of snow removal from sidewalks and will bring that draft revision to the Council when it has been completed. Mr. Rosland I No formal action was taken. No action was taken. DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY DESIGNATED. Member Bredesen introduced the following resolution and moved adoption: RESOLTJTUON DESIGNATING DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: John C. Wallin is hereby designated to serve as a Director of the Suburban Rate Authority, and J. N. Dalen is hereby designated to serve as Alternate Director of the Suburban Rate Authority for the year 1986 and until their successors are appointed. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO LOGIS DESIGNATED. Member Bredesen intro- duced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO LOGIS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: John C. Wallin is hereby designated as a Director of LOGIS and Kenneth E. Rosland is hereby designated as Alternate Director of LOGIS for the year 1986 and until their successors are appointed. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. 12/16 /85 59 EDINA SUN-CURRENT DESIGNATED AS OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR 1986. Member Kelly intro- duced the following resolution, moving adoption: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR 1986 BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the Edina Sun-Current be and is hereby designated as the Official Newspaper for the City of Edina for the year 1986. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Resolution adopted. m a ORDINANCE NO. 121-A6 (SEVERANCE PAY) CONTINUED TO 1/1/86. Mr. Rosland explained that a part of the revision of the City's personnel rules is the revision of the severance benefits section. There are three basic changes in this section: 1) rather than tying eligibility for severance solely to a mandatory retirement age which is now 70, it provides the severance benefits for those who qualify for retirement benefits under PERA, 2) the conversation of some unused sick leave is being proposed as part of the severance benefit for those who can qualify, and 3) a general clarification of requirements for severance and who is eligible to receive them. Three examples of severance benefits under the proposed ordinance were presented. of the retiree by an individual at a lower salary. he objected conceptually to the proposed sick leave benefit. that the arguments presented for severance pay were good ones even though severance pay in the private sector is basically for work force reduction; that it would be consistent with the PERA retirement rules and would provide early retirement for those employees chosing to do so; and that there were pros and cons on the proposed sick leave benefit. In response to Member Richards, Mr. Rosland explained the PERA rules for retirement provide that under the Rule of 90 if your age and years of employment total 90 you may retire. Presently, the State legislature has the Rule of 85 in effect for a two year period to encourage early retirement. Member Richards commented that he did not support the philosophy of encouraging early retirement. Member Turner made a motion to direct staff to re-draft the ordinance to provide severance benefits tied to the PERA retirement rules, to eliminate the sick leave benefit and provide that the effective date be December 31, 1985 for action by the Council at its January 6th meeting. Mr. Rosland pointed out that funding'would come from replacement Member Bredesen stated that Member Turner said Member Kelly voiced support on both issues. Following further discussion, Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner Nays : Richards Mot ion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO ENCOURAGE DOG LICENSE RENEWALS DISCUSSED; POLICY ADOPTED. Mr. Rosland explained that.in order to encourage the prompt renewal of dog licenses it is recommended that the license renewal fee for the first two months of each year be $5.00 per dog or $2.00 per neutered dog. are $20.00 per dog or $7.00 per neutered dog with issuance of a permanent type license tag. for license renewal fee for the first two months of each year at $5.00 per dog or $2.00 per neutered dog. Presently, dog license fees Following discussion, Member Kelly made a motion to adopt a policy Motion was seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. ACTION ON STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES AND RECOMMENDED TRANSFERS CONTINUED TO YEAR-END COUNCIL MEETING. Expenditures and Recommended Transfers for Year Ended.December 31, 1985" pointing Mr. Rosland presented the "Statement of Estimated out the three areas of higher cost: legal and court services, fire protection payroll and insurance. It was informally agreed to hold this agenda item for action by the Council at its Year-End Meeting on December 30, 1985 SO that the Council could review the statement. CLAIMS PAID. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Kelly for payment of the following claims dated 12/16/85: $1,801.77, Swimming Pool Fund $162.24, Golf Course Fund $33,858.61, Recreation Center Fund $11,130.35, Gun Range Fund $457.99, Utility Fund $385,727.59, Liquor Dispensary Fund $53,078.49, Construction Fund $336,205.21, IMP Bond Redemption 112 $7,266.00, Total $1,035,725.54; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims..dated 11/30.85: General Fund $143,318.42, Park Dept $56.71, Art Center $802.69, Swimming Pool Fund $1,219.13, Golf Course Fund $5,418.79, Recreation Center Fund $9,077.93, Gun Range Fund $494.18, Utility Fund $21,152.96, Liquor Dispen- sary Fund $199,399.63, Construction Fund $20,346.08, Total $401,286.52. General Fund $206,037.29, Art Center Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner Motion carried. There being no further business, Mayor Pro-Tem Richards adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. City Clerk